Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 commenced in Wuhan China in 2019 and soon spread worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 enters the cell by binding to the ACE II receptor and begins viral replication. The effects and clinical findings of SARS-CoV-2 on the liver, kidney, heart, gastrointestinal (GI) system and especially lungs have been widely discussed. However, the effects on the pancreas-another organ that also expresses ACE II-have not been studied. Methods: This work prospectively evaluated data from 316 patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. The patients were categorized into three according to the severity of pneumonia (mild, severe, critical). Demographic data, rate of pancreatitis, biochemical parameters, and radiological images from each group were analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups and outcomes were compared: COVID-19 patients with acute pancreatitis (Group P) and without acute pancreatitis (Group C). Results: The median age was 54 (18-87), and the median age for patients with acute pancreatitis was 55 (26-84). As an expected finding, we found a positive correlation between advanced age and mortality (p ¼ 0.0003). 12.6% of the patients had acute pancreatitis. While pancreatitis was not seen in patients on mild status, the rate of pancreatitis was 32.5% in critical patients. Hospitalization and mortality rates were higher in patients with COVID-19 accompanied by acute pancreatitis (p ¼ 0.0038 and p < 0.0001, respectively). C-Reactive Protein (CRP) and ferritin were significantly higher in those who had pancreatitis (p < 0.0001). D-Dimer and procalcitonin levels had only a small difference (p ¼ 0.1127 and p ¼ 0.3403, respectively) Conclusion: Acute pancreatitis alone is a clinical condition that can lead to mortality and may be one of the reasons for the exaggerated immune response developing in the progression of COVID-19. Our results point out that the presence of pancreatic damage triggered by SARS-CoV-2 can deteriorate the clinical condition of patients and the mortality rate may increase in these patients.

Despite strict measures taken by many countries, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to be an issue of global concern. Currently, there are no clinically proven pharmacotherapies for coronavirus disease 2019, despite promising initial results obtained from drugs such as azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. Therefore, the repurposing of clinically approved drugs for use against SARS-CoV-2 has become a viable strategy. Here, we searched for drugs that target SARS-CoV-2 3C-like protease (3CL pro) and viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) by in silico screening of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved drug library. Well-tolerated and widely used drugs were selected for molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to evaluate drug-protein interactions and their persistence under physiological conditions. Tetracycline, dihydroergotamine, ergotamine, dutasteride, nelfinavir, and paliperidone formed stable interactions with 3CL pro based on MD simulation results. Similar analysis with RdRp showed that eltrombopag, tipranavir, ergotamine, and conivaptan bound to the enzyme with high binding free energies. Docking results suggest that ergotamine, dihydroergotamine, bromocriptine, dutasteride, conivaptan, paliperidone, and tipranavir can bind to both enzymes with high affinity. As these drugs are well tolerated, cost-effective, and widely used, our study suggests that they could potentially to be used in clinical trials for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2infected patients.

Background Major lumbar spine surgery causes severe pain in the postoperative period. There are few studies regarding the effect of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) effect on lumbar surgery and its effect is still controversial. Therefore, the study aimed to investigate the effect of ultrasound-guided low thoracic ESPB on opioid consumption and postoperative pain score. Material and methods Seventy-eight patients undergoing elective open lumbar spine surgery were randomized into two groups. In ESPB group (n = 35) received ultrasound-guided ESPB and in the control group (n = 35), there was no block. Postoperative opioid consumption as morphine equivalent dose, numerical rating scale, mobilization time, discharge time and side effects, bolus deliveries, rescue analgesia doses were evaluated. Results Total opioid consumption as morphine equivalent was higher in the control group than the ESPB group (p = 0.000). Compare with the control group, the numeric rating scale scores were lower in the ESPB group at the 6th, 12th, and 24th hours (p < 0.05). The patient-controlled analgesia button pressing number in the postoperative 24-h period was lower in the ESPB group (p = 0.000). In the postoperative 24-h period, the need for paracetamol in the ESPB group was lower and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (p = 0.008). Rescue analgesia (diclofenac) doses were higher in the control group (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of side effects and mobilization times. Conclusion ESPB is adequate for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and can reduce opioid consumption compared with standard analgesia.